Neutron star mergers are far more likely than black hole mergers and yet LIGO conspirators don't report even weak and inconclusive signals (that could be compared with Integral's data and become valid evidence in the end):

http://www.lastwordonnothing.com/201...m-wow-to-yawn/
"What surprised the LIGO collaboration instead was the nature of what they'd detected. Of the various gravitational-wave-producers that LIGO might observe—the kind that disturb space-time to such an extent that LIGO could register the aftershock—the collision of binary black holes was perhaps the least likely. Supernovae, neutron stars, colliding neutron stars: These were what the LIGO collaboration foresaw as far more common candidates. And now LIGO has detected a second pair of colliding black holes."

http://www8.nationalacademies.org/ss...ay.aspx?id=146
"Advanced LIGO is likely to observe mergers of double neutron star (NS/NS) binaries at a rate of a few to a few hundred per year; and black-hole/neutron-star (BH/NS) binaries perhaps in a comparable range of rates." Benjamin J. Owen Pennsylvania State University, Endorsed by: David H. Reitze (University of Florida), Stanley E. Whitcomb (LIGO-Caltech)

http://aasnova.org/2016/10/26/narrow...ve-detections/
"Just over a year ago, LIGO detected its first gravitational-wave signal: GW150914, produced when two black holes merged. While we didn't expect to see any sort of light-based signal from this merger, we could expect to see transient electromagnetic signatures in the case of a neutron star–black hole merger or a neutron star–neutron star merger — in the form of a kilonova or a short gamma-ray burst. While we haven't yet detected any mergers involving neutron stars, LIGO has the sensitivity to make these detections..."

http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Sp..._bl ack_holes
"Models predict that the merging of two stellar-mass black holes would not produce light at any wavelength, but if one or two neutron stars were involved in the process, then a characteristic signature should be observable across the electromagnetic spectrum. Another possible source of gravitational waves would be an asymmetric supernova explosion, also known to emit light over a range of wavelengths. [...] Integral is sensitive to transient sources of high-energy emission over the whole sky, and thus a team of scientists searched through its data, seeking signs of a sudden burst of hard X-rays or gamma rays that might have been recorded at the same time as the gravitational waves were detected. "We searched through all the available Integral data, but did not find any indication of high-energy emission associated with the LIGO detection,"..."

Conclusion: Gravitational waves don't exist. LIGO's 2015 "discovery" was a fake - the dress rehearsal took place in 2010:

https://www.researchgate.net/blog/po...-not-a-failure
"Finally, how do you know you are doing something correctly if you have never done it before? That was a concerning question during Initial LIGO since we had never detected a gravitational wave before. How do we know our data analyses are not missing them? And, when we do detect one, how do we know that the science we have extracted from the signal is reliable? The answer is to do a blind injection test where only a select few expert administrators are able to put a fake signal in the data, maintaining strict confidentiality. They did just that in the early morning hours of 16 September 2010.. Automated data analyses alerted us to an extraordinary event within eight minutes of data collection, and within 45 minutes we had our astronomer colleagues with optical telescopes imaging the area we estimated the gravitational wave to have come from. Since it came from the direction of the Canis Major constellation, this event picked up the nickname of the "Big Dog Event". For months we worked on vetting this candidate gravitational wave detection, extracting parameters that described the source, and even wrote a paper. Finally, at the next collaboration meeting, after all the work had been cataloged and we voted unanimously to publish the paper the next day. However, it was revealed immediately after the vote to be an injection and that our estimated parameters for the simulated source were accurate. Again, there was no detection, but we learned a great deal about our abilities to know when we detected a gravitational wave and that we can do science with the data. This became particularly useful starting in September 2015."

Note that in 2010 "a select few expert administrators" deceived everybody, misled astronomers into wasting time and money on the fake, and "this became particularly useful starting in September 2015"!

Pentcho Valev